||The Bookworm: By Karl Spitzweg|
click here to view larger image
KC & Associates
By Craig B Hulet?
Working Papers are produced approximately
each month depending on the length
and content of research. Prices for each
publication are set according
to content and length.
Throughout each text the author
uses citations and quotes from recognized
sources rather than footnotes
although footnotes may appear as well.
Mr. Hulet has been producing
white papers and working papers for
over twenty years: 60 to date.
A new book is being prepared
Mr. Hulet's fourth: due somtime during 2004.
The Coalition of the Billing: Bushs War in Iraq is facing a Paradigmatic shift: Expect the casualties to mount for the Empire you pay for.
Picture by Gomez
Craig B Hulet?
"Should the people
of the world look at the United States, Governor, and say -- should
they fear us? Should they welcome our involvement? Should they see
us as a friend to everybody in the world?
It really depends upon how our nation conducts itself in foreign policy.
If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us.
If we're a humble nation
but strong, they'll welcome us."
"We will not be shaken
by the thugs and terrorists.
Whos we Mr.
In the meantime Mr. Bush has asked more than a dozen countries to join a new international military force to protect the United Nations in Iraq, according to late reports from Washington. The Bush Administration has approached France, which led opposition to the war in Iraq, as well as India, Pakistan and other nations that were reluctant to join the U.S.-led coalition that invaded Iraq. The list includes a good global mix, said a State Department official familiar with the proposed force. (Source; U.S. Seeks Global Military Force That Would Protect U.N. in Iraq, Washington Post , April 07 2004)
That is not what Bush is doing at all. Bush is trying to make an event out of asking for UN support for his war that most every other nation opposed. Its a show. A show for Americans only, so Bush can later claim on the election trail that it is the UNs fault Americans are dying in Iraq not his and Blairs culpability! And of course no Arab countries or neighbors of Iraq are on the list, with Turkey notably absent. The new force is considered essential to the fragile political transition because the Bush administration is relying on the United Nations to return to Iraq to help organize elections after the occupation ends on June 30. (Ibid.) Well see if the date is held to. And one doubts the UN is so foolish as to fix Bushs blunder in a war that never needed fighting!
The U.N. mission is likely to include activities such as assistance with a census, voter registration, civic education and training in the run-up to an election, as well as monitoring the polls by the years end -- in places where even the current coalition is not deployed, U.S. officials said. Potentially there could be a lot more places that forces would have to go. This is an innovative process. None of us has done this before. (Ibid.)
No, none of us
out here are doing anything at all except funding it. All Americans
are responsible for this war and every tax season that comes around
from this day forward shall be a day to remember who is causing the
deaths and destruction... every single one of us taxpayers are fully
responsible. It is just Bush and his gruesome crew that is doing
the doing in Iraq. The dollar cost analysis? $1.8 billion each day
of your money collected in taxes. The bloody cost: U.S. forces have
suffered their bloodiest week in Iraq since just before the fall of
Baghdad a year ago, that is what the press repeats over and over.
I am still thinking what fall of Baghdad? But the world
is reporting 40 combat deaths in the seven days from March 31 to April
6. Unlike earlier spikes in casualty figures, like the ones last autumn
that resulted from a few helicopter crashes, the latest jump reflects
a broad range of incidents, from fierce firefights to roadside bombs.
U.S. military deaths in Iraq since the invasion now total 635, including
444 caused by hostile fire. The number of wounded has reached 2,988,
the number of AWOLS 1,700, suicides maybe 500.
According to Rummy all we are facing is this: You have a mixture of a small number of terrorists, a small number of militias, coupled with some demonstrations and some lawlessness. (Ibid. Bradley Graham Washington Post ) Precisely what we called the Vietcong before they got the name recognition of being what they were, Vietcong guerrillas. Others with more combat experience on the ground than doddering old Rummsfeld contradict the Defense Secretarys perspective on many of these attacks:
Rumsfeld also rejected the notion that the intensified fighting represented a turning point. But he called it a test of will, saying the militants were engaged in a power play before the planned June 30 handover of sovereignty to an Iraqi government. (Ibid. Graham, Washington Post ) This is simply nonsense, as the real motivation is the elections here in America; the insurgents, as they are called throughout the worlds press rather than terrorists (or thugs), understand this all too well. The president of the United States is their enemy and to suggest they dont understand this is an election year here in the States is to remain ignorant of just how not ignorant Iraqis are. An unelected Iraqi government, hand picked lackeys of the Bush regime, are never going to rule Iraq...never! All Rumsfeld can do is warn and bluster, vowing robust military action to restore calm, and then Rumsfeld warned Iraqi pilgrims that holy cities were potentially dangerous during the upcoming Shiite holiday of Arba'in. He said Iraqi authorities had asked that U.S. forces stay away from the cities and so the troops will not be in position to protect pilgrims. (Ibid., Graham, Washington Post )
The Marine Corps, with 25 dead,
suffered the largest share of military deaths in the seven days ending
April 6. The Marines took charge last month of a large area west of
Baghdad that has been a hotbed of Sunni resistance. In one set of
battles Tuesday in Ramadi, 12 Marines died engaging Sunni militants,
and four have died since last weekend in operations to secure Fallujah,
where four civilian contractors were killed March 31 and their bodies
mutilated. (Ibid.) Civilian contractors? These were mercenaries ultimately
in the pay of the United States Pentagon. Lets call them what
they are. You are, after all paying the mercs work with your
tax dollars to fight this jolly little war.
In Sundays (April 4,
2004) fighting, Shiite militia forces barraged the Blackwater commandos,
four MPs and a Marine gunner with rocket-propelled grenades and AK-47
fire for hours before U.S. Special Forces troops arrived. A sniper
on a nearby roof apparently wounded three men. Someone tell me this
sniper was a terrorist? and not a well-trained trooper! U.S. troops
faced heavy fighting in several Iraqi cities that day. The Blackwater
commandos, most of whom are former Special Forces troops, are on contract
to provide security for the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority
(CPA) in Najaf. With their ammunition nearly gone, a wounded and badly
bleeding Marine on the rooftop, and no reinforcement by the U.S. military
in the immediate offing, the company sent in helicopters to drop ammunition
and pick up the Marine.
The four men slain the Wednesday previous to Sundays assaults in Fallujah were also Blackwater employees and were operating in the Sunni triangle area under even more hazardous conditions -- unarmored cars with no apparent backup -- than the U.S. military or the CIA permit. One senior Blackwater manager has described those killings to U.S. government officials as the result of a high-quality attack as skilled as one that can be mounted by U.S. Special Forces. (Ibid.) There have been questions as to whether the Blackwater mercenaries were even armed as they were taken out so easily; they most certainly were, but if the attack was as stated by the Blackwater manager and former SEAL, as high-quality an attack as our own Special Forces could have mounted, the four never had a chance to open fire. It was over before they could count. Rumsfeld is clearly being disingenuous as to the capability these insurgents have now and will continue to display in the future.
Whether they are former Medina Republican Guard, the Special Republican Guard or other well-trained troops from the former regime or from other nations as well, is historically important (we need to know what we are up against) but also somewhat irrelevant as they are acting under the war-fighting capabilities necessary to defeat (ultimately) the occupation forces: i.e., using classical urban guerrilla warfare. These are not simple un-trained terrorists. Clearly this is not the opening salvo of what this writer warned, if not predicted, may come to pass at some point in this ongoing guerrilla war. That being, that at some point we will likely face an even more deliberate conventional war-making capability against U.S. forces. Just as we fought two distinct enemies in Vietnam, 1) the guerrilla warriors of the mobile Vietcong, which is what we are facing in Iraq and Afghanistan; a) in Iraq an international urban guerrilla war [inner city jungles is a most apt phrase] which we cannot ever completely win as long as U.S. forces are in the Middle east, b) in Afghanistan a classic mountain guerrilla resistance that has never been defeated anywhere in the world); and 2) a more modern conventional army likely being quietly organized and prepared secretly for a specific theatre of operations [including artillery, tanks and APCs] and may likely launch from across one or more, simultaneously, of the porous borders surrounding Iraq [Syria, Iran, Turkey and Saudi soil] not unlike the TET offensive of 1968 in Vietnam.
What are we doing here in America as citizens allowing the Pentagon, or coporations receiving Pentagon funds, to hire mercenaries outright, admittedly and out of the taxpayers unwitting coffers? What are the likes of John Kerry saying about this, or Ted Kennedy? Or Lady Hillary of WalMart? The four victims of the Wednesday attack, according to Blackwater spokesman Chris Bertelli, were escorting trucks carrying either food or kitchen equipment for Regency Hotel and Hospitality. Regency is a subcontractor to Eurest Support Services (ESS), a division of the Compass Group, the worlds largest food service company. ESS provides food services to more than a dozen U.S. military dining facilities in Iraq, according to news accounts. Thus they receive tax dollars redistributed via reconstruction funds or the Pentagon proper.
The private military industry got its start in the early 1990s with the rise of the firm Executive Outcomes, the very same South African company that Simon Mann and many of the other coup suspects used to work with. Executive Outcomes, which was linked with multinational mining and energy interests, fought in Angola, Sierra Leone and Congo. While the firm formally went out of business in 1999, its success spawned a global industry of copy cats. In the decade since it began, the private military industry has mushroomed. Private military firms now operate in more than 50 countries and do up to $100bn business a year.(Source: The Dogs of War Go Corporate The London News Review, March 19, 2004 Peter W. Singer National Security Fellow, Brookings Foreign Policy Studies)
Blackwater, a security and training company based in Moyock, N.C., while it prides itself on the high caliber of its personnel, many of whom are former U.S. Navy SEALs, they are mercenaries nonetheless. And ultimately these services are being paid for, one way or another [lets not do the corporate shuffle we all know happens to mask and veil the source of funding] we taxpayers are hiring mercs. Blackwater has 450 employees in Iraq, many of them providing security to CPA employees, including the U.S. administrator, L. Paul Bremer, and to VIPs visiting Iraq. Blackwater has applied to occupy a former MIG air base near Baghdad as a counterterrorism training facility for Iraqi forces. The training range will mirror the 6,000-acre Moyock site, which is frequented by U.S. law enforcement and military personnel. (Ibid., Graham, Washington Post)
I have argued elsewhere that this war will likely last a generation. That we are facing an international urban guerrilla war which began in earnest on 9/11, that we cannot ultimately win. (See www.kcandassociates.org for some 80 articles directly pertaining to Iraq, and guerrilla warfare) But everything has changed since 9/11. America is not any longer the free Republic based upon democratic principles it once was. American democracy is for sale. The wars the United States, all of us taxpayers as guilty as Bush and his gruesome crew, we are fighting in the Middle East and Central Asia can only create more instability in the region, and increase terrorist attacks (which have reached a higher level since 9/11, not fewer as we have been told (see KC&A site).
These are the wars of a weakened nation-state with dreams of Empire bedazzling the perfunctory leadership. We have a military much too large for homeland defense but one that is much too small, too weak, to rule an empire These are corporate wars for corporate resources for a corporate empire that bears no resemblance to America per se. Wars in behalf of corporations that have not paid a dime in income tax since 1989!
Too many corporations are finagling ways to dodge paying Uncle Sam, despite the benefits they receive from this country. -- Senator Carl Levin, D-Mich., who requested the GAO report. The Senator has it precisely backwards. The taxes paid are for the subjects to pay; the wars fought are for the corporate empire, American-led but not American in any sense of the term. The corporations are instructing the federal government, defining it, driving it. It includes foreign corporations with American board members and often an American (if that term means anything any longer) as CEO.
Overall, the report said that more foreign-owned corporations avoided taxes between 1996 and 2000 than their U.S. competitors -- 71 percent to 61 percent, respectively. When the study focused on larger corporations, defined as those with more than $250 million in assets or $50 million in gross receipts, tax avoidance by U.S. corporations outpaced foreign-owned companies. In total, foreign-controlled corporations paid an average of $11.88 per $1,000 of gross receipts in 2000, the study said. U.S. corporations paid an average of $14.75 per $1,000. The Senate Finance Committee is reviewing 55 boxes of IRS records on almost 700 private agreements that the agency has struck with multinational corporations on the way prices have been set for intracompany transactions since 1991. Such transfer pricing arrangements can be a source of abuse when goods are sold between subsidiaries at inflated prices. The IRS and companies say their private pricing arrangements, which are voluntary and often done in conjunction with tax authorities in other countries, avoid legal disputes when the companies are audited. (Ibid.)
Companies use losses, improper intercompany pricing arrangements and accrued tax credits to reduce or eliminate their tax bills, the GAO said in the study, reported by The Wall Street Journal. 45 percent of all international trade is intra-firm trade; it is between Ford of Bonn and Ford of Detroit. Of the 100 largest economies in the world, America the largest, 55 are corporations! America is now a corporate state, Corporatism is its ideology. What better describes Corporatism (Corporazioni in 1920s Italian terminology) than the hiring, by corporations like Halliburton KBR, of corporate mercenaries, whose funds are derived ultimately from taxing the subjects of empire, who pay trillions of dollars in taxes as individuals, all the while the same corporations reaping the harvest pay not one nickel in taxes to the empire?
If the Empire were American,
as academics like Noam Chomsky and Chalmers Johnson keep repeating,
the U.S. corporations would have to tithe Caesar no less than the
Plebeians and serfs, you and I. But they are the recipients of the
taxes collected, the corporations receive the booty taken from the
mass of subjects, the people, through a vast organ of redistribution
that was set in motion by FDR and other liberal politicians in the
hopes of bettering the lives of the people. But FDR did
not live to remove the corporate nexus he put into power. Truman wasnt
strong enough just as Eisenhower was not either. By John Kennedy the
fix was in, the corporate structure had seized all significant power
from the peoples representatives. Corporatism is defined by
its wars, follow the cash, indeed, follow your cash ... as it flows
left or right, Democrat or Republican, from you to their grubby grasping
Why guerrillas will continue to attack America forever.
By Craig B Hulet?
It is finally admitted by at least one on-the-ground General that America is in a full-on professionally organized guerrilla war; we are not fighting disgruntled homeowners who are angry with the lack of electricity; we are not facing paid foreigners from the wealthy Hussein loyalists, nor are we facing classical terrorists of the Al Qaida ilk. As this analyst has stated in interviews and articles for over eighteen months, we will be facing an international urban guerrilla war which began on 9/11 on our own soil. Our involvement in the Caspian region, Afghanistan and now Iraq, now possibly Iran, less likely but certainly on the Bush banquet platter, North Korea, will bring more American deaths abroad, a growing guerrilla resistance wherever we have troops on the ground, and further attacks here at home. Here is what one General stated recently:
I think describing it as guerrilla tactics being employed against us is, you know, a proper thing to describe in strictly military terms...
Central Command chief Gen. John Abizaid, who commands U.S. forces in Iraq, said a guerrilla war is exactly what U.S. troops are confronting, not what Mr. Rumsfeld claimed himself on June 30th, that it was not anything like a guerrilla war or an organized resistance.
Abizaid said U.S. forces are fighting remnants of Saddams Baath Party throughout Iraq. He said mid-level officials of Saddams government, including from the old intelligence and security agencies and the Special Republican Guard, have organized at the regional level in cellular structure. Abizaid said they are conducting what I would describe as a classical guerrilla-type campaign against us. Its low-intensity conflict in our doctrinal terms, but its war however you describe it.
U.S. Military intervention has been identified as the major cause for terrorist acts against Americans and American facilities, corporate, military and governmental by none other than the United States Pentagons Defense Science Board:
"The level of resistance, I'm not so sure I would characterize it as escalating in terms of number of incidents. But it is getting more organized and it is learning. It is adapting -- it is adapting to our tactics, techniques and procedures. And we've got to adapt to their tactics, techniques and procedures," Abizaid said. (Source: Reuters News Service July 16, 2003) To face this growing threat without alarming the American people the Pentagon will have to send more troops and keep those already there maybe indefinitely.
Even more desperate has the Pentagon become with this recent story which suggests American corporate mercenaries shall likely be included in the future scenario in Iraq because Americans cannot tolerate deaths of military personnel; but seriously, nobody cares about mercs dying.
With large parts of Iraq still
gripped by lawlessness and guerrilla warfare, the Pentagon is planning
to hire a private security firm to arm and train thousands of former
Iraqi soldiers to guard government buildings, pipelines and other
"The idea, first and foremost, is to have Iraqis providing security for Iraq at places like the national museum and other fixed sites and there are civilian companies that do that very well," a senior military official told The New York Times. "An added benefit is that it will reduce the load on US troops." Although the US has 150,000 soldiers in Iraq, the Pentagon admits their presence has been stretched thin, the lack of numbers exacerbated by an unexpected level of resistance from Iraqi fighters. Unexpected? That is highly suspect. This guerrilla war was not only expected by the administration they knew it would come, would be planned, and later this too was confirmed:
But be assured, it has been admitted it is spreading throughout all of Iraq (and Afghanistan) and the Shiite clerics in the South have warned of an extended resistance if America doesnt leave Iraq now. Two U.S. soldiers were killed near Mosul while 10,000 Shiite Muslims staged anti-American demonstration over the weekend of July 20, 2003:
Certainly the troops do not want to stay if they are not welcome as liberators (and they are now), but they find only retaliation for speaking out.
Morale is dipping pretty low among U.S. soldiers as they stew in Iraq's broiling heat, get shot at by an increasingly hostile population and get repeated orders to extend their tours of duty. Ask any grunt standing guard on a 115-degree day what he or she thinks of the open-ended Iraq occupation, and you'll get an earful of colorful complaints. But going public isnt always easy, as soldiers of the Armys Second Brigade, Third Infantry Division found out after Good Morning America aired their complaints. The brigades soldiers received word this week from the Pentagon that it was extending their stay, with a vague promise to send them home by September if the security situation allows. Theyve been away from home since September, and this weeks announcement was the third time their mission has been extended. It was bad news for the divisions 12,000 homesick soldiers, who were at the forefront of the force that overthrew Saddam Husseins government and moved into Baghdad in early April. On Wednesday morning, when the ABC news show reported from Fallujah, where the division is based, the troops gave the reporters an earful. One soldier said he felt like he'd been kicked in the guts, slapped in the face. Another demanded that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld quit. The retaliation from Washington was swift.
American military doctrine argues that for an attacking force from a foreign land to defeat a guerrilla army they must have a 10-to-1 ratio of troop strength. We lost Vietnam while we maintained that level of deployment. Normally the guerrillas win against conventional forces: Vietnam, Cuba, China under Mao, Laos and Cambodia were both abandoned by the U.S., but the best example of the many is still America itself which defeated a superior military power using precisely guerrilla tactics first used by French partisans against Napoleon. If we just use the figure of , say, 100,000 guerrillas opposed to our occupation of Iraq, Afghanistan and the region in question (which is easily a believable number the longer we stay) it means we would need one million ground troops to fight the resistance. We, of course, do not even have one million ground troops in our military chain of command; we will need to draft the youth to fight this war and the other war, the almost forgotten war on terrorism. And there are several Congressmen who are proposing we do just that.
The map below shows where the main body of guerrilla activity has been taking place. Which, one might suppose is where the main body of newly drafted 18-32 year-olds will be deployed sometime in their future.
Source: DEBKA File map
If steps to deal with the problem
in terms of capabilities are limited, can anything be done to address
intentions -- the incentives for any foreign power or group to lash
out at the United States? There are few answers to this question that
do not compromise the fundamental strategic activism and international
thrust of U.S. foreign policy over the past half century. That is
because the best way to keep people from believing that the United
States is responsible for their problems is to avoid involvement in
their conflicts. (Source: Richard K. Betts: Foreign Affairs Vol. 77
No. 1, Pg. 40)
Is Democracy feasible in Iraq? How are we doing in Afghanistan?
Dead Afghan children and their father
This analyst argues from a premise that what we are told is going on in foreign and domestic policies is not necessarily what is, in reality, going on. All governments lie. All leaders, at one time or another, must, in their opinion and for politically sensitive reasons they are not willing to demonstrate, lie. It seems rather odd that this needs to be repeated; since the early 1960s we as a people have witnessed each President and too many crooks within each administration, finding themselves caught in some major scandal, some political act which they of necessity kept quiet on, and so they lied and were caught (Since Water-Gate each now has the generic equivalent and are called Something-Gate). All governments lie and most get caught at it. We do not have quote Lincoln to know why they get caught.
President Bush continues to
claim American troops are liberators, not occupiers. But the only
people who can decide this truth is the Iraqi people, not one American
can make this distinction; not one journalist or talk-show host can
make the claim one way or the other. The prospect for democracy rests
with how this issue is seen and understood by the people of Iraq,
not Mr. Bush. The prospect for democracy rests with liberty first,
as the means to establish democracy. Democracy is a process of developing
a relationship between the governed and the governors. There are many
democracies; not all of them are free. Without true liberty democracy
in a false dream, or worse, an illusion lived under.
There are many handicaps to establishing democracy in Iraq. First the country must be rebuilt, literally from ashes. This takes enormous sums of money. The Oil for Food efforts under UN sanction certainly cannot do this. Even if the US multinational monopoly oil companies extract the oil, nobody is going to buy it as it stands today and for a very long time. There will be little resources from the sale of oil for some time. Why this a problem was pointed out in a recent discussion group forum of the elite Council on Foreign Relations. One of the participants pointed out this unsavory Oil fact:
Only makes sense, but Mr. Bush
cannot allow the specter to raise its ugly head in our media, so the
obedient state-run media of America comply. But the fact remains.
There you have it: What we can do in war we cannot necessarily accomplish for peace. And the first premise is twofold, 1) the Iraqi people are becoming quite informed as to what we, the United States that is, wants in Iraq: absolute control, a permanent military presence, a puppet regime, and their oil, water and infrastructure under US control. Revenue to accomplish these illiberal destinies shall come from oil revenues. Whose oil? (See above.); and 2) there is no liberty in Iraq and without liberty there can be no true democracy.
Now there can be an illiberal democracy (a euphemism created by academics to describe democracies which are only democracies in name and not in substance), i.e. elections are frauds or deceptions, dissent is censored, civil liberties (traced in history to the US and French revolutionary writings) not guaranteed, true free enterprise eliminated, where government grants monopoly status over the industries and the commodities that matter. (Shoe repair and a local diner remain untouched though less and less competitive as monopolies continue to raze the free enterprise sanctuaries.) To put this in better perspective, one author responsible for coining the phrase stated it this way,
What little liberty is left here in America is eroding before our eyes under The Patriot Act I and II, under the new electronic surveillance organs enlarging daily around us, the rule of law is eroding rapidly. The US regime is centralized like never before under Homeland Security. The CIA and the Pentagon ready to operate domestically right now. Probable cause is a sad and noble concept, now lost. Conflict here at home, wars abroad. The utter lack of dissent allowed in even the most local of media outlets, TV, Radio and the printed mediums; one is regularly and viciously attacked for questioning the Presidents motives; the term treason launched against the most mundane of critics. (Treason being a legal term applicable only to its actual act in time of war [declared] becomes a term used by the ignorant to silence someone they cannot possibly understand semantically; i.e. they are verbicidal.) Mobs are organized to confront anti-war protestors in support of the troops. Some of us know that 99.9 percent of those that protested the anti-war protestors have never voted, never gave a thought for the troops over the decades (Agent Orange victims, Gulf War illnesses, VFW Halls rejection of Vietnam Vets because they lost the war, etc.) throughout the past and it remains a lie now.
What many were, and remain
really about, is their personal bigotry and hatred of liberals.
A catchall term those on the far-Right use for anyone they dislike
the views of. These folks are lacking any understanding that Jefferson
and Paine were classical liberals and America was a liberal free Republic
based on liberal democratic ideals. But these same bigots are, in
the main, bigots because they do not or cannot read. It is these that
make-up the mundane masses which will believe democracy has come to
Iraq; the same ones that believe the war is over and we won. So, democracy
in Iraq? While it is on decline in America? And it is supposed to
be America, which institutionalizes it in Iraq? If they achieve anything
in Iraq, and we know they will call it democracy even
if it is not, just as we in America continue to mouth
but were free.
Date: May 01, 2003
Copyright 2000-2014 K C & Associates Send site questions or comments to Katie711a@kcandassociates.org